COMPEC II Q A Round 1.docx

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS, ROUND #1

CONSTRUCTION O&M PROGRAM EXECUTION CONTRACT (COMPEC) II

Question #1: Table 1. Proposal Organization Table (pg 85) – Volume I Executive Summary that will summarize the entire proposal is allocated 5 pages. Volume II Executive Summary, that is to be a duplicate of Volume I (Pg 88 paragraph 2a), is indicated to be 3 pages. Can you clarify the page count for the Executive Summary?

Answer #1: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #2: Table 1. Proposal Organization Table (Pg 86) – Volume II tab for General. Please clarify what information is required under this Tab, and is it to be included in the 8 pages allocated for Mission Capability as shown in Table 1?

Answer #2: General has been deleted from Table 1 and as a separate section in Volume II. The requirements have been merged into the section for Mission Capability. See amendment 0001.

Question #3: Table 1. Proposal Organization Table (Pg 86) – Volume II has a page count of 10 for several subsections, including the Attachment L-2 PPI Form. As the PPI Form itself is several pages long and we are allowed up to eight projects, please clarify if these forms are to be included in their entirety in this section; and if so, if they are o outside the 10 page limit for the subsections.

Answer #3: The Table has been changed to designate 32 pages for the Present/Past Performance Information Forms. See amendment 0001.

Question #4: There are several references to submittals of SF 294(s) and SF 295(s) for PPI projects and as part of the Volume V Small Business Submittal. May we submit ISR (Subcontracting Report for Individual Contract) and/or SSRs (Summary Subcontract Report) to validate past performance if applicable?

Answer #4: Yes, the Individual Subcontracting Report (ISR) is the former SF-294 and the SSR for Plan Type Individual is the former SF-295.

Question #5: Can you please confirm that the deadline for questions is Friday, July 22, as indicated in Section A, page 3?

Answer #5: L-3 was changed “10 days of receipt of the RFP” to “10 days before RFP closing date” to comply with Section A. See amendment 0001.

Question #6: Will you provide an anticipated workload distribution at each site?

Answer #6: No, annual workloads will vary from year to year. Each base determines the best method of execution based on available funds and the requirement.

Question #7: Can offerors pick which sites we wish to support, and if so, how do we show this in our pricing? Or must our pricing entail all sites lumped together?

Answer #7: In order to be technically acceptable, offerors must demonstrate sufficient resources to effectively implement and manage COMPEC requirements; have sufficient resources to effectively execute multiple, concurrent, geographically dispersed COMPEC TOs; demonstrate licensed professional engineers and architects in multiple CONUS locations; and demonstrate the team’s geographically dispersed presence capable of effectively executing COMPEC requirements.

After award of the multiple award IDIQ contracts, the offeror will then have the opportunity to compete or not compete on individual task orders.

Rates should be such that they will apply to any geographical location.

Question #8: Volume II – Per Table 1 of the solicitation, eight (8) pages are allowed for Mission Capability (Resources and Management approach) and bonding Surety Letters. We request that the Bonding Surety Letters be excluded from the page count. We also request that the page limit for the Mission Capability section be increased to at least 25-pages (40 pages were allowed in COMPEC I).

Answer #8: The bonding surety Letters have been changed to unlimited and the page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #9: Volume II – In Table 1 of the solicitation, it looks like there is a typo on the page limit for the executive summary. Three (3) pages are allowed for the executive summary for Volume II, but this is to be a repeat of the executive summary from Volume I, which is 5 pages.

Answer #9: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #10: Volume III – Per Table 1 of the solicitation, PPIs are currently part of the sections that collectively have a 10-page limit. The PPI template provided by AFRC is 3 pages for each project and we are allowed to submit up to 8 PPIs. Therefore PPIs alone would total 24 pages or more. We request that the PPIs be excluded from the 10-page limit.

Answer #10: The Volume II page limit for the Present/Past Performance Information Forms was changed to 32 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #11: Is Volume V – Small Business Participation required if the offeror is an 8(a) company?

Answer #11: Yes, a small business must submit a Small Business Participation Plan {See FAR 15.304(c) and DFAR 215.304}.

Question #12: The SOW does not include details on the anticipated services beyond the services described in the Apr 21, 2011 pre-solicitation notice “The work will be for new construction, repair, alteration, and renovation, by design-build, demolition, and/or construction related operations at Air Reserve locations and Air Reserve Tenant Locations. Potential types of work include, but are not limited to, (1) Roofing construction – Must be capable of repairing/replacing all types roofs to include, but not limited to, standing seam metal, built up, PVC membrane, EPDM, and shingle, etc; (2) mechanical/Electrical – to include, but not limited to, HVAC, interior electrical, fire detection and suppression, direct digital controls, etc.; (3) Pavement repairs/replacement – to include streets, parking lots and airfields, rubber removal and paint striping; (4) Painting – to include interior and exterior facility painting; (5) Super Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER).” Will additional information be provided on the expected scope of services or types of projects?

Answer #12: Basic requirements described in the SOW are further refined through the use of individual project Task Orders (TO). TOs will be issued for a wide variety of S/R&M requirements. Examples include facility renovations including all sub-systems (mechanical, electrical, plumbing, fire detection/suppression, structural, architectural, etc) and infrastructure repair and construction (utilities, pavements, POL, etc). The contractor's team shall be prepared to support any sustainment (maintain), restoration (repair), and modernization (construct) of facilities and infrastructure. NOTE: The synopsis was amended to delete reference to Super Simplified Acquisition of Base Engineering Requirements (SABER).

Question #13: In Section L, the page limits state that the Executive Summary should be no longer than 5 pages for Volume I and III, but only 3 pages for Volume II. Since the Executive Summary is requested to be duplicated in all three of those volumes, is the page limit 5 pages for the Executive Summary in Volume II?

Answer #13: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #14: Volume III Instructions states on page 91 of 102 “The Government will consider only those projects which are complete as of the date specified for receipt of proposals. Credit will be given only for work actually completed, not for anticipated scope. Do not submit projects that are not complete. However, Section M states (on page 100-101 of 102) that “The Government will consider only those projects which are physically complete as of the date specified for receipt of proposals or are currently on-going for a minimum of one calendar year. Credit will not be given for anticipated scope.” Does this mean that projects that are not complete may be included if the work started at least one year ago, but will only work that has been completed will count?

Answer #14: Section M, Recency definition is changed to delete “or are currently on-going for a minimum of one calendar year”. See amendment 0001.

Question #15: Section L, Attachment 6 includes a spreadsheet for labor cost proposal. The spreadsheet has a column with a number of predetermined labor hours for each labor category. Is that number fixed? Is it only for the prime contractor, or does it have to represent the entire team (From page 93, Paragraph 4) b): “Offerors shall provide only one completed price rate sheet schedule (Attachment L-6) per team.” If it is to represent the entire team (i.e. those team member firms with a signed Teaming Agreement and/or Letter of Intent), does this mean that the labor rate must be a “composite rate” representing the entire team at every potential work location?

Answer #15: Yes, the labor hours for each labor category are fixed. The rates should represent the entire team for every potential work location. Task Orders will be competed among the COMPEC II awardees. These rates are used for evaluation purposes and for sole source negotiations such as modifications to existing task orders.

Questions #16: Is the hourly rate for each labor category shown in Section L, Attachment 6 meant to be one rate for all skill levels (i.e. 0-years of experience to 10+ years), or should we provide a breakout based upon years of experience as we typically do for A-E Services type of contracts?

Answer #16: The hourly rate for each labor category shown is meant to be one rate for all skill levels.

Question #17: Block 13A of SF 1442 requests an original and 1 copy. Section L table 1 requests an original and 3 copies. Please clarify.

Answer #17: Block 13A of the SF 1442 should state “3” copies.

Question #18: SF1442 Continuation B, states, “All questions must be submitted no later than 10 days before RFP closing date.” L-3. RFP Technical Clarifications states, “…shall submit all questions in writing within 10 days of receipt of the RFP, as does L-5.C (3). Please clarify.

Answer #18: L-3 was changed “10 days of receipt of the RFP” to “10 days before RFP closing date” to comply with Section A. See amendment 0001.

Question #19: Volume I – Administrative/Contract Documentation, paragraph d) Validity Statement states that we should make a statement based on the proposal acceptance period specified in the Standard Form 1442, page 1, block 12 of the RFP. Should this instead be a reference to block 13D?

Answer #19: Yes. See amendment 0001.

Question #20: Volume I – Administrative/Contract Documentation, paragraph h) Completed Section K, Representations and Certification, states that “The Offeror’s proposal shall include a signed copy of SF1442 and Sections A through K.” Are these documents to be presented in Volume I, or Volume IV of the proposal?

Answer #20: Volume I. See amendment 0001.

Question #21: Table 1 Volume II Executive Summary has a page limit of 3 pages, , yet the instructions on page 88 of 102 states it is a duplicate of the Executive Summary of Volume I, which has a page limit of 5 pages. Please clarify.

Answer #21: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #22: Volume II Technical Capabilities: Please consider raising the page limit for Mission Capabilities. Eight pages is not adequate to cover resources, resumes, organization chart, geographic coverage, management approach, quality and safety.

Answer #22: The bonding surety Letters have been changed to unlimited and the page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #23: Volume II Technical Capabilities: e) General currently has tab but does not have specific information called out for inclusion. Should this be tabbed section or just instructions for the balance of the volume?

Answer #23: This was moved under 2) d). See amendment 0001.

Question #24: Volume III – Present/Past Performance: ii.3.a. and its subparagraphs reference Present/Past Performance Information (PPI) Forms (Attachment L-2), a 4 page form, which offerors should use to submit up to 8 projects. Please clarify that these PPIs fall outside of the stated 10 page limit stated in Table 1.

Answer #24: The page limit for Present/past Performance Information Forms was changed to 32 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #25: Volume III – Present/Past Performance: ii.3.b and its subparagraphs reference the Past Performance Questionnaire (Attachment L-3) which is to be sent to project POCs. Can we submit CCASS rating in place of Past Performance Questionnaires?

Answer #25: Yes, submittal of CCASS ratings on completed projects is acceptable. See amendment 0001.

Question #26: If we are not including Past Performance Information from subcontractors, do we need to submit a Consent Letter?

Answer #26: At least two (2) PPI forms or a completed CCASS report shall be submitted for each team member performing ≥20% of the work. If you are not proposing any subcontractors that will perform ≥20% of the work, then a consent letter need not be submitted. See amendment 0001.

Question #27: Please confirm that the solicitation number under #1 on Section L, Attachment 1 Template for Transmittal Letter should be FA6643-11-R-0003?

Answer #27: Yes.

Question #28: Can our Approved DCMA Master Subcontracting plan with an addendum including the goals be submitted in lieu of Section J, Attachment 2?

Answer #28: Yes if you can meet the page limitation; however, your addendum should include the same information as Section J, Attachment 2.

Question #29: L Page 85 (Proposal Organizational Table). Please confirm that the 3 pages for the Executive Summary in Volume II is a type, as the RFP states that it is to be a duplication of the executive summary for Volume I, which is five pages.

Answer #29: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #30: Please confirm that the bonding letters are excluded from the page count (Pg. 85 has them excluded but Table 1 (page 86) has them included in the 8 pages for Mission Capability.

Answer #30: The bonding surety Letters have been changed to unlimited and the page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #31: L pg. 86 (Proposal Organizational Table). Please verify that the PPI documents (3 pages each required for 8 projects or 24 total pages) are excluded from the 10-page Past Performance Summary.

Answer #31: The page limit for Present/Past Performance Information Forms was changed to 32 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #32: L Pg 87f i. If we have a team member with a signed TA, do you need the Letter of Intent?

Answer #32: No. See amendment 0001.

Question #33: In which volume do you want to see the signed & executed SF 1442 & SF30s? Page 87 h) calls for it in Volume I, and page 93 4)c) calls for it in Volume IV.

Answer #33: Volume I. See amendment 0001.

Question #34: L Pg 91. Present/Past Performance Documents. Can we reformat Attachment L-2 to better fit the required data as long as we provide all requested information in the same order as required? For instance, can we delete the instructions after the heading (ie instructions after Reference contact Information)?

Answer #34: Yes Question #35: L Pg 91. Does the Present/Past Performance Summary sheet (table) count in the page count of 10 pages?

Answer #35: Yes Question #36: L Pg 91. Please confirm that you don’t want the organizational structure change for the team (only for the prime).

Answer #36: Organization structure change should be submitted for the team.

Question #37: Please clarify what this means: “One hard copy of the Present/Past Performance Summary Sheet shall be included with the proposal submission NLT the RFP due date.” Does that mean emailed directly to you or included in the proposal?

Answer #37: Included in the proposal.

Question #38: Pg. 91, ii 3: It is stated that “the government will only consider those projects which are complete…” Please confirm that projects that have received final inspection are considered complete, even if not fully closed out.

Answer #38: Yes, projects that have received final inspection are considered complete.

Question #39: On Page 3 of 102, item B. states “All questions must be submitted no later than 10 days before RFP closing date.” Later, on page 82 of 102, in item C. General Instructions (3) states “If an offeror believes that the requirements in these instructions contains an error, omission, or are otherwise unsound, the offeror shall immediately notify the CO in writing with the supporting rationale, but no later than ten (10) days after release of the solicitation.” Can you please clarify the cutoff date to ask questions; is it July 22nd, or June 27th, or some other date?

Answer #39: L-3 was changed “10 days of receipt of the RFP” to “10 days before RFP closing date” to comply with Section A. See amendment 0001.

Question #40: On Page 85 of 102, in Table 1. Proposal Organization Table, we are told that for Volume I we have a 5 page limit for the Executive Summary, for Volume II it says the Executive Summary is limited to 3 pages, and for Volume III it says the Executive Summary is limited to 5 pages. Later, on Page 88 of 102, item 2) Volume II - Technical Capabilities, a) states “Executive Summary (duplication of executive summary in Volume I, Contract Documentation).” Please confirm that the Executive Summary to be included in Volumes I, II & II are all to be the same 5-page item.

Answer #40: The page limit for the Executive Summary in Volume II, Technical has changed to 5 pages. See Amendment 0001.

Question #41: On Page 85 of 102, in Table 1. Proposal Organization Table, we are told that for Volume II the entire Mission Capability section is limited to 8 pages. When we turn to Page 88 of 102 we see that Subfactors 1.1 through 1.3 are included in the Mission Capability Subfactor. Is it the government’s intent to limit this entire section to just 8 pages?

Answer #41: The page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #42: On Page 85 of 102, in Table 1. Proposal Organization Table, under Volume II it appears to indicate that the Bonding Surety Letters are also included in the 8 page limit for Mission Capability, but just above that table, in (ii) Proposal Format, item n Pages Counted, we are told the Bonding Surety Letters are not included in the page count. Please confirm that Bonding Surety Letters are not included in the page count.

Answer #42: The bonding surety Letters have been changed to unlimited and the page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #43: On Page 85 of 102, in Table 1. Proposal Organization Table, we are told that for Volume III the page limit is 10 pages. It appears that includes the PPIs, which per the form provided are 4-pages each. Please clarify if the PPIs are part of the Volume III page limit of 10 pages.

Answer #43: The page limit for Present/past Performance Information Forms was changed to 32 pages. See amendment 0001.

Question #44: On Page 91 of 102, under ii. Present/Past Performance Documents 3. a. it states “ Each team may submit a maximum of eight (8) PPI forms. A minimum of two (2) PPI forms shall be submitted for the prime contractor. If the prime contractor is a Joint Venture (JV), each JV partner shall submit a minimum of two (2) PPI forms…” The JV that will be submitting on this as the prime contractor is one that was established in 2005 and has extensive relevant experience as its own entity. We would like to know if it is acceptable to submit all eight PPI forms for work completed by the JV. We feel that since this JV has been successfully performing similar work for the past 6 years that those projects are much more relevant than projects performed separately by the JV partners themselves.

Answer #44: Yes.

Question #45: We’ve looked at Attachment L-1, Transmittal Letter, Attachment L-3, Present/Past Performance Questionnaire and Pages 91 - 92 that cover the requirements for Present/Past Performance Documents and can’t find the due date that the PPIs are due to AFRC. We are told that we must use the “attached Transmittal letter without revisions, if that’s the case how can we tell our customers when the PPQ’s are due?

Answer #45: PPQs are due by the time and date specified for receipt of proposals.

Question #46: RFP Section L-5, 3.ii.3 states, “The Government will consider only those projects which are complete as of the date specified for receipt of proposals. Credit will be given only for work actually completed, not for anticipated scope. Do not submit projects that are not complete.” RFP Section M, 3.ii., second sentence states, “The Government will consider only those projects which are physically complete as of the date specified for receipt of proposals or are currently on-going for a minimum of one calendar year (emphasis added). Credit will not be given for anticipated scope.” Please confirm that projects ongoing for at least one year are allowable, even if they are not complete.

Answer #46: Section M, Recency definition is changed to delete “or are currently on-going for a minimum of one calendar year”. See amendment 0001.

Question #47: RFP Section L-5, 3.ii.3 and RFP Section M. 3.ii. – if the original scope of a task order has been completed but the contractor is still performing work under government-added modifications, does this project qualify as complete?

Answer #47: Only projects that have received final inspection are considered complete.

Question #48: Reverence Volume 2, Technical – Mission Capability – Subfactor 1.3, SB Participation. The instructions for this subfactor forward to Volume V – Small Business participation. Volume V requires a SB Subcontracting plan IAW FAR 19.7. A SB Subcontracting Plan that meets the requirements of r FAR 19.7 will fill the 8 page limitation for the Mission Capability section (8 pages). Can this Subfactor 1.3 be excluded from the 8-page limitation for the Mission Capability section?

Answer #48: No, but the page limitation for Mission Capability has been increased to 25 pages. See amendment 0001.